For reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that convicted the Defendant of the facts charged.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations, but did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, by misapprehending the legal doctrine on deception and fraud amount, or by violating the presumption of innocence.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below contains an error of law in the incomplete hearing and misapprehension of legal principles on the facts that serve as the basis of sentencing hearing is

However, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the amount of the punishment is unreasonable

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.